UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ SEVIER COUNTY SCHOOLS FEDERAL CREDIT UNION; │ SUSANNE MUNSON; GEOFFREY WOLPERT; CHARLES │ MCGAHA; CHARLENE MCGAHA; ROBIN NICHOLS; │ GREGORY NICHOLS; REX NICHOLS; SARAH MORRISON, > No. 20-5174 Plaintiffs-Appellants, │ │ │ v. │ │ BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY, │ Defendant-Appellee. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville. No. 3:19-cv-00138—Travis Randall McDonough, District Judge.

Argued: December 2, 2020

Decided and Filed: March 5, 2021

Before: MOORE, GILMAN, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

_________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Gregory Brown, LOWE YEAGER & BROWN PLLC, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellants. John S. Hicks, BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWTIZ, P.C., Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Gregory Brown, Christopher Field, W. Scott Hickerson, LOWE YEAGER & BROWN PLLC, Knoxville, Tennessee, Donald K. Vowell, THE VOWELL LAW FIRM, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellants. John S. Hicks, Christopher E. Thorsen, BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWTIZ, P.C., Nashville, Tennessee, Nicholas W. Diegel, BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWTIZ, P.C., Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

GILMAN, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which MOORE, J., joined. GRIFFIN, J. (pp. 16–25), delivered a separate dissenting opinion. No. 20-5174 Sevier Cnty. Schs. Fed. Credit Union v. Page 2 Branch Banking & Trust Co.

_________________

OPINION _________________

RONALD LEE GILMAN, Circuit Judge. This is a putative class action brought by the Sevier County Schools Federal Credit Union and other account holders (the Plaintiffs) against the Branch Banking & Trust Company (BB&T). The Plaintiffs allege that BB&T failed to honor a commitment made by one of its predecessors, the First National Bank of Gatlinburg (FNB), promising that the annual interest rate on certain high-interest Money Market Investment Accounts was guaranteed to “never fall below 6.50%.”

The Plaintiffs might well prevail on the merits of their dispute with BB&T because, on the surface at least, the bank is trying to wriggle out of a commitment made years ago to these Plaintiffs by FNB. But the issue presently before us is not the merits of this dispute; instead, we must decide whether the merits should be resolved by a court or by an arbitrator. This is because BB&T’s Bank Services Agreement (BSA) specifies that all disputes between the parties “shall be determined by arbitration.”

BB&T moved to dismiss the complaint and to compel arbitration, which the district court granted. For the reasons set forth below, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

I. BACKGROUND A. Factual background

1.